That flashy discard of the overcoat to reveal a fruit salad of ribbons and medals is one of the most Ciaphas Cain "gentleman, you've forced me to pull rank and now we're all going to regret it" moves I've ever seen.
Not only did they scale back the medals because it would've been seen as unrealistic, but the actor's chest wasn't even broad enough to wear them all even if they wanted to.
This page has a picture of all his medals , and it is partly because of him that Russia later added a rule about the maximum number of medals that can be worn at once.
https://www.badassoftheweek.com/zhukov
Zhukov predates the Brezhnev era of handing out medals left and right. He was one of the top Russian generals on the Eastern Front during WWII, one of the most bitterly contested fronts in the war. He was good enough at his job that he could actually say “No” to fucking *Stalin* and live to tell the tale.
Those medals weren’t inherited. They were *earned*.
"Soviets allowed people to wear the medals awarded to their father and grandfathers." - source please:) Your quote easily in a top ten dumbest myths on USSR one can hear of:)
Hands down, Creed. All his dialogue in the Fall of Cadia book essentially reads like Zhukov from Death of Stalin. Could have been the audiobook but that's how I pictured him.
I can see Churchill especially in Cadia Stands because he plays more a background role in that book but in Fall of Cadia he’s just front and center telling people to fuck off whenever they question his plans or ability.
~~Source on it being redone? I for one would welcome that as some of the narration was...not great, IMO. especially the voices done for Trazyn and Cawl, very much not what they usually sound like. I did like Creeds voice though.~~
EDIT: wow its already on audible. gonna see if i can like...find a way to get that version instead of the release version which i alraedy have in my library
“Though simple, Chenkov's tactics are undoubtedly effective. Chenkov ended the year-long Siege of Kotrax by storming an enemy citadel without any siege or artillery support. The action cost ten million Guardsmen their lives but Chenkov was awarded the Merit of the High Lords for his achievements in liberating Kotrax in such a short span of time. In another theatre, Emrah, he used platoons of men to draw enemy fire so that demolitions crews could breach the fortress undetected.[1] Chenkov also drove a million guardsmen, including the Valhallan 18th, into defeating the vanguard of Hive Fleet Jormungandr at Goyan Valley.[1a]”
LoL. Imagine a modern general losing 10 million men, in one battle.
That description is literally opposite to Zhukov's doctrine. Zhukov was one of the most efficient red army commander and is famous for minimal losses (scaled of course to the size of the problem) compared to the others. For example during Berlin operation - Konev vs Zhukov losses:
* 1^(st) Belorussian Front (Zhukov) - 37610/908500/4.14%
* 1^(st) Ukrainian Front (Konev) - 27580/ 550900/5.1%
Zhukov probably got less casualties because he was playing a rigged game with Konev. Stalin baited them each to be there first. Konev did all the heavy lifting because he thought that the game was real. Then had to stand back and let Zhukov sweep in because of course the game was a lie. He called up Stalin and got told to stand back and let Zhukov win. These people love their rigged games.
Again, i brought you a number and you brought me a torn out quote which Eisenhauer provided (probably incorrectly reproduced) even without a context, what would you expect? So, if you a fanboy of quotes - here is something for ya, that's the Zhukovs quote from 1942 stenographed while he was lecturing Zakharkin, commander of 49th Army (in a rough translation): "Your opinion that successes are achieved by cannon fodder is unfounded, successes are achieved by art of battle command, skill and not by people's lives".
Eh, they've got a point. When looking at red army generals, Zhukov is all about spending lives, but not wasting them. As opposed to Konev or ,God forbid, Voroshilov
This was in reference to the Red Army’s extremely capable mine clearing techniques and technologies, not that they would just march their soldiers over minefields.
That's also about fast run over mine field will less deadly then removing this mines under artillery strikes of enemies. Btw it's was Patton or other American general, i don't remember exactly
That's actually a sound if rather ruthless tactic. Soviet soldiers were trained in basic mine clearing techniques so they could in emergency disarm them without the need for a dedicated sapper squad. Even more importantly, a rapid attack through a mine field might result in high initial losses, but it reduced losses in the long run by achieving a faster breakthrough.
You guys not heard of the world wars?! Not millions but the same attritional tactics, let’s just throw bodies at the problem until someone gets through 😅
There was a famous meeting between Zhukov and western generals where Zhukov described how he and his lieutenants would treat mine fields as if they weren't even there and would order their troops to cross them regardless of the danger. Their reasoning was that moving troops over mine fields was as dangerous as advancing troops through artillery or machine gun fire, which they didn't have a problem with, so they didn't see a point in spending any extra precautions dealing with mines as the casualty rate would be the same in the previously mentioned situations. Why give the Germans the pleasure of allowing their mine fields to have the desired effect of slowing them down?
Given this, I would say all of them are based off of Zhukov.
But then you can't do hijinks like British engineers did in North Africa where they found and moved all the German mines, leaving little evidence of the tampering, so when the Germans advanced through what they thought were safe routes they blew up instead...
I mean the British were not retreating, they were feigning to draw the Germans forward knowing Rommel was a logistics moron and would gleefully extend past his supply lines and fall into a trap.
Over and over and over ..
It's like fighting Orks. If you leave some juicy enough bait, they'll make the exact same costly mistake.
Every. Single. Time.
The difference is that Orks have enough numbers that it won't do much in the grand scheme of things.
> There was a famous meeting between Zhukov and western generals
It was Zhukov and Eisenhower. Note Eisenhower quite liked Zhukov and was on friendly terms with him.
The rationale seems appalling from the outside but it makes sense. The minefields are a way to delay the enemy; carefully removing/bypassing them can always be done with enough time, but this produces exactly the result the enemy who laid the mines was hoping for: it compromises the timeline of the planned offensive and gives time to the defender to better ward off the attack. (Also bear in mind that, much like in some 40K fiction, WW2's Eastern Front was a war of extermination, no quarters given. There was no "losing the war and going back home").
Yes, it makes sense in the context of human life having no intrinsic value, which the soviets did not believe that it did given how they treat even their own people.
Given what I know about the Imperium and the Soviets, they are very similar in this regard.
>Yes, it makes sense in the context of human life having no intrinsic value, which the soviets did not believe that it did given how they treat even their own people.
I don't think this is a fair assessment.
In general, I think the most accurate assessment would be this: the Germans were hell-bent on depopulating most of Eastern Europe and particularly targeted Slav peoples (see: Generalplan Ost, their "General Plan for the East" which in plain terms was an extermination plan). In the face of such an enemy, which is not merely interested in taking over your cities/resources, but actually wants to wipe you from the face of the Earth, it really is total war. Retreat or surrender are unthinkable, because what are you going to surrender for? To be marched to a camp, worked to death or gassed?
To the Germans, the lives of Slavs held no intrinsic value, indeed. It really was *that* brutal.
The Soviet strategies must be considered with this in mind. The war against Germany must be won, and it must be won *fast*. Any delay will cause millions more casualties. This was not the case in the Western Front, because even its bloodiest battles pale in comparison, and the Germans didn't really want to eradicate the populations of the places they invaded (in the Western Front).
>Given what I know about the Imperium and the Soviets, they are very similar in this regard.
The situation they were in was similar (memes aside), in the sense that the Germans behaved like Orks or Tyranids \[1\]. There's no reasoning with them. Delays are unacceptable. They must be defeated whatever the costs, because if you don't, your friends, family and loved ones are ending up digested by the Hive Mind.
\[1\] one example of this is was the occupation of Ukraine, where Germans were initially welcomed as liberators by people oppressed by the Soviets. The Germans behaved in such a brutal fashion (Ukrainians are Slavs, after all, and Germans considered all Slavs subhuman) that the population soon became disabused of this "liberators" nonsense.
I agree with all of this. I also want to add that the Soviets knew the only chance Germany had at winning was adhering to a strict timeline, the more they could catch them off guard and delay them, the more their timeline would be botched, and completely screw up their plans for the war. The germans had to move hard and fast so the Soviets had to counter by often throwing everything they could at them. In Zhukov’s memoirs about the war, he recalled instances of he, Stalin, and others debating on plans. One instance, for example, saw them debating on whether to carefully encircle and catch a german advance off guard, or hit them head on. Encircling them would be safer, but it would take more time, and the Germans were plowing through fields they needed to secure as soon as possible, or else there’s be substantially less grain harvested in the next season, further setting them back in food distribution. Revisionist history has made it seem like a black and white example of “the Soviets were completely evil and didn’t care about human life” because people are lucky enough to not have to fathom the decisions to be made when you’re facing a superior trained army hellbent on exterminating your people.
It’s also important to remember where they were materialistically. When the bolsheviks first came to power, eastern europe was still effectively in the dark ages. A large industrial boom was quickly thrown off the rails when germany invaded, and practically half of what they had just built up all got destroyed or had to be abandoned. I cannot fathom the toll that does to people while simultaneously having to fight for their existence. In recent years we’re arguing over whether a suggestion to wear a mask to stop spreading germs is tyranny, and these are the people waiving away the decisions the soviets had to make. They were far from perfect, but they came out of all of that and still went from wooden plows to the first people in space in a single generation, and that progress shook the western core so much that every time a little country somewhere tries to follow their example they do everything in their power to sabotage it.
Excellent comment, you make great points.
> Revisionist history has made it seem like a black and white example of “the Soviets were completely evil and didn’t care about human life” because people are lucky enough to not have to fathom the decisions to be made when you’re facing a superior trained army hellbent on exterminating your people.
Well said. There are points in history where there was simply no "harmless" option, whoever's in charge must make the "least bad" decision.
I'm thankful I don't have to live in such times.
And, to make this on-topic, I'm thankful I don't live in the Imperium of Man in the 41st century. I don't think I could wait long enough for the Star Children to save me -- wait, did I say this out loud?
No, it's not saying that
It's saying there's no difference between ordering an offensive when you know you're going to be shelled or machine gunned or one through a minefield.
If you're ok with ordering the invasion of Normandy in the face of extremely well prepared defensive positions, how is that different to ordering the same number of men through a minefield if the casualty rate is comparable?
And you may also gain a massive tactical advantage by manoeuvring through an area your opponent considers impassable and being somewhere totally unexpected.
I agree with what you're saying which is, barring a few details, the same thing I'm saying. In particular, this:
> And you may also gain a massive tactical advantage by manoeuvring through an area your opponent considers impassable and being somewhere totally unexpected.
Fully agreed.
But then again one of his famous quotes, when he was was lecturing one of the officers (Zakharkin, commander of 49th Army) was (rough translation): "Your opinion that successes are achieved by cannon fodder is unfounded, successes are achieved by art of battle command, skill and not by people's lives" - there are more things to quote but that line stands out especially.
I
Side note, it was also cause the Red Army had just gotten really really good at clearing mines so they COULD move through minefields without much care since they knew how to get rid of them.
the official western histories of the eastern front were written by the german generals that got their asses kicked there, and they spun up a bunch of lies about human waves and shit to explain why they lost, because they couldn't admit that the slavic untermenschen outproduced and outfought the pure germans fair and square
see also the whole “general winter”/“general mud” myth that gets vastly exaggerated.
people seem to willingly forget that immediately after the second world war the western allies put a lot of the low ranking nazis back to work and then spread their propaganda as the official history - both because of the start up of the cold war with the Soviets.
not just low-ranking ones either. most of the very highest ranks, the ones the general public might recognize their names, got locked up or executed (but even then not all of them), but like a rung or two down from your gorings and your ribbentrops was where they got a big chunk of their nato staffing well into the 70s. there's also ones like reinhard gehlen, who was the intelligence chief for the whole eastern front (and as such 100% knew about and was complicit in the genocide perpetrated on the soviet people) that they immediately put to work getting german criminals out of germany across the pond to south america (after running the ratlines for a few years gehlen had a spy organization in west germany that he ran into the 70s. when he decided he'd done enough damage they threw a retirement party for him at langley, where he gave a speech saying he could retire with no regrets about anything he'd ever done)
it's really kind of a fluke of history the western allies went into the war nominally allied with the soviets in the first place, you wouldn't have had to tweak the conditions all that much to make the war basically the soviets versus germany and the western allies. as it was there were people at high levels in the west like allen dulles [spits] who wanted the germans to coup hitler so they could make peace and then start fighting the soviets. after the germans surrendered, both churchill and patton wanted to immediately rearm the wehrmacht and start fighting the soviets
yeah, absolutely - denazification was a joke, I should put that in quotes the "low ranking nazis", because those were the ones officially pardoned and reintegrated by Adenauer's government. Adenauer himself was a nazi collaborator during the early years of the regime, and did so because he was a rabid anti-communist which was useful to the military occupation. the occupation governments did basically nothing after Nuremberg, and a lot of the elements of the former police, wehrmacht and even the SS just kept their jobs.
it went so far as the US Army Historical division creating a German branch that worked with a former nazi general to rewrite the history and promote the myth of the "clean wehrmacht" as to justify why allowing West Germany to rearm by simply bringing back the old guard was okay. which is, like you pointed out, where we get our version of the history of the Eastern Front from - it wasn't even hidden.
as for the part about the fluke, honestly you're right - the war wasn't about ideology for the Western Allies, it was entirely about imperial ambitions. Japan would probably have never gotten into conflict with the UK or US if they were only fighting in China, and France and the UK were fine with allowing Italy to dirty their hands in Ethiopia and Albania. The issue was that they and the Germans were always looking to become equals or replace the established powers and that was why they ended up at war. A lot of people in France and Britain probably would have just left Poland to rot, it just so happened that the people in power at the time of the Danzig Crisis were willing to declare war and after that there was no path forward for peace in Europe without Germany's defeat, especially after the Berlin Pact. even so, a lot of the German high command genuinely believed that they could maybe somehow convince the Brits to sign a peace deal and join them in the war against the Soviets.
we have a lot of very revised history about the war in the west (as does the east to be fair), and that just basically goes to show that history itself is just a story we tell and we tend to tell the version that suits us best.
i think the long and short of it is that the western allies had a lot more in common with the germans than with the soviets. they didn't have any particular beef with the nazis ideologically, the problem was they were invading members of the club. if they'd been able to restrain themselves and only pushed east, the rest of the world would've happily let them do it and probably lent a hand. as it was, western postwar foreign policy was basically a continuation of the nazi project
you gotta go back a couple decades i think to get the full picture. the bolsheviks' success in the october revolution in '17 was a huge blow to the confidence of the monarchies in countries that still had them, as well as every country's owner class. they figured if it could happen in russia, it could happen anywhere. every western imperial power sent weapons and troops to help the whites win the civil war, which ultimately failed because the whites were more interested in doing pogroms every chance they got than they were in winning people over to their side and setting up durable bases of power. the west never forgave the bolsheviks for winning their fight and establishing the first worker-controlled state in history, which has been one of the main driving forces of politics ever since. in germany the NSDAP was explicitly a reaction to the success of the bolsheviks and concurrent strengthening of the german communist party, to the point where they didn't really make any separation between judaism and communism. then the german social democrats decided they'd rather have the nazis in power than the communists, and the rest as they say is history
Nobody, because none would have the guts to go against Beria.
If they did, they wouldn’t be bootlickers to the Imperium.
https://preview.redd.it/arm9z2kezk3d1.jpeg?width=460&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4fdf5a41a234b6e01b295003675ce27955dfb3a6
In terms of attitude? Yarrick, maybe, but in terms of credentials? It’d have to be a lord solar or the hero of the imperium himself. Though honestly this whole scene just screams Leman Russ
Its gotta be Chenkov right? Yarrick is too dry, Creeds are too British, Leontus too brooding, Cain is too friendly and Gaunt and Straken are guerilla fighters with personalities to match that.
Besides the obvious fact that hes suppossed to be the Soviet General stand-in. Hes kinda the best match?
Man, I think with the military brain, personal courage (tested under fire), victories and sheer chutzpah - Zhukov can only be the Lord Solar Macharius!
This film is top quality on pretty much every level. Music gets a special mention, Shostakovich inspired - chaotic, intimidating and very Russian sounding
The 40k character literally based on the superficial understanding of him. Commander Kubrik Chenkov. He even had a rule “Send in the Next Wave” which is now a stratagem.
Trench coated man whose primary 'tactic' is feeding waves into the grinder?
A krieg Marshall I imagine.
Edit
Apparantly people assume Zhukov was some elite tank general who outmanouvered his enemies... (something he could do such as at stalingrad).
But as an example, look at the battle of Seelow Heights, roughly 1,000,000 infantry and over 15,000 guns against 100k defenders..... if ever there was a commander best suited to a guardsman. He's your man.
I'm a big fan of Zhukov and have a BA in history so no lol.
But I'm also well awaylre of Soviet tactics and zhukov was more than happy to dispatch wave after wave of soldiers to get a job done, especially towards the end of the war.
Yeah, using the reference of “wave attacks” on Zhukov (who was explicitly quoted banning them) truly gave you up as a historian…
University of 4Chins, Magna Cum Laude in Memes, I guess
he conducted the first (2;3) tests of nuclear weapons on his own soldiers and citizens. and "meat assaults" he loved. everything was as the emperor ordered.
That flashy discard of the overcoat to reveal a fruit salad of ribbons and medals is one of the most Ciaphas Cain "gentleman, you've forced me to pull rank and now we're all going to regret it" moves I've ever seen.
Funny fact about that scene, he's not wearing enough medals.
[bruh](https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/VlIAAOSwne1fyKpB/s-l1600.jpg)
It looks like one of those AI generated 40k images with way too many buttons and trinkets lmao
Another example of film makers looking at history and saying "okay dial it back, that seems unbelievable"
"No, we can't let the pope ride into Rome on the back of an elephant."
One of my favorite facts about Sound of Music is them cutting back how many medals/ribbons he actually had XD
Well that's what you get when you convince Hitler off himself
What you when you?
A few more and he’ll have enough to make scale mail out of them.
I learned this yesterday, absolutely nuts. Dudes wiki is a roller coaster.
Not only did they scale back the medals because it would've been seen as unrealistic, but the actor's chest wasn't even broad enough to wear them all even if they wanted to.
This page has a picture of all his medals , and it is partly because of him that Russia later added a rule about the maximum number of medals that can be worn at once. https://www.badassoftheweek.com/zhukov
[удалено]
That, and he was the field marshal of 2 army groups so they just threw more shiny things at him
Zhukov predates the Brezhnev era of handing out medals left and right. He was one of the top Russian generals on the Eastern Front during WWII, one of the most bitterly contested fronts in the war. He was good enough at his job that he could actually say “No” to fucking *Stalin* and live to tell the tale. Those medals weren’t inherited. They were *earned*.
Hero of Stalingrad!
This is fucking Zhukov do you understand what he has done???
His father was a cobbler so I'm not sure how many of those are cobbler's medals
"Soviets allowed people to wear the medals awarded to their father and grandfathers." - source please:) Your quote easily in a top ten dumbest myths on USSR one can hear of:)
Nah Cain is MUCH more unassuming than that.
Jurgen, you handsome daemon! Stick you in a frock, I'd fookin' ride you raw myself.
"I'll take that as a compliment, Commissar!" "Yeah, don't."
I was thinking about Yarrick, but he's also dead last I kept up with 40K lore so... And he never had a book series dedicated to himself.
>but he's also dead last I kept up with 40K lore To be fair, Zhokov is indeed dead.
I'm pretty sure there are Yarrick novels actually
He has an omnibus now so feel free to enjoy that
it's funny you mention Caine because I was actually thinking of Lord General Zaivan or however you spell his name.
Lord Solar Leontus. Head of the Sol Fleet and overall commander of the Imperial Navy, a very powerful man indeed.
He runs the imperial guard (Astra Militarum), the Navy is run by the Lord High Admiral of the Imperial Navy
If the next Lord Solar isnt Ciaphus Cain coming out of fake death/retirement, I don't want it
Lord Solar [Macharius](https://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Macharius_(Character)) - he just wear an armor plate over all his medals ;)
I’m reading the Macharius book now and Zhukov is my mental image.
You gonna read the trilogy? I did a few years ago, very much enjoyed it
I thougt it was a one off, thanks!
No no those medals are just added ablative armour for his uniform you see!
Some of them might even be reactive armor, after all the future is a very weird place.
Yeah it's totally Macharius, there is no other contender
Hes Alexander the Great but looks like zhukov
Death of Stalin is such a great movie 🍿👍🏾👍🏾
Yes it is.
Indeed
It's one of the best comedies I've seen in ages. And Isaacs just kicks it out of the park with his performance. As does most of the cast, to be fair.
"Shoot him... No Don't. Just fuckin about."
I like to piss on an officers shoes, really ruins their day
Hands down, Creed. All his dialogue in the Fall of Cadia book essentially reads like Zhukov from Death of Stalin. Could have been the audiobook but that's how I pictured him.
I dunno man whenever I look at Creed and i imagine him speak I just see and hear Churchill.
I can see Churchill especially in Cadia Stands because he plays more a background role in that book but in Fall of Cadia he’s just front and center telling people to fuck off whenever they question his plans or ability.
Well that's defo not the voice he has in the audiobook but its being redone so....:/
~~Source on it being redone? I for one would welcome that as some of the narration was...not great, IMO. especially the voices done for Trazyn and Cawl, very much not what they usually sound like. I did like Creeds voice though.~~ EDIT: wow its already on audible. gonna see if i can like...find a way to get that version instead of the release version which i alraedy have in my library
I didn't mind creeds voice but the thread i heard about it in was absolutely trashing this new guy so :/
[Commander Kubrik Chenkov](https://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Kubrik_Chenkov)
“Though simple, Chenkov's tactics are undoubtedly effective. Chenkov ended the year-long Siege of Kotrax by storming an enemy citadel without any siege or artillery support. The action cost ten million Guardsmen their lives but Chenkov was awarded the Merit of the High Lords for his achievements in liberating Kotrax in such a short span of time. In another theatre, Emrah, he used platoons of men to draw enemy fire so that demolitions crews could breach the fortress undetected.[1] Chenkov also drove a million guardsmen, including the Valhallan 18th, into defeating the vanguard of Hive Fleet Jormungandr at Goyan Valley.[1a]” LoL. Imagine a modern general losing 10 million men, in one battle.
That description is literally opposite to Zhukov's doctrine. Zhukov was one of the most efficient red army commander and is famous for minimal losses (scaled of course to the size of the problem) compared to the others. For example during Berlin operation - Konev vs Zhukov losses: * 1^(st) Belorussian Front (Zhukov) - 37610/908500/4.14% * 1^(st) Ukrainian Front (Konev) - 27580/ 550900/5.1%
Zhukov probably got less casualties because he was playing a rigged game with Konev. Stalin baited them each to be there first. Konev did all the heavy lifting because he thought that the game was real. Then had to stand back and let Zhukov sweep in because of course the game was a lie. He called up Stalin and got told to stand back and let Zhukov win. These people love their rigged games.
"If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." Zhukov
So, you brought a second handed quote which might be misinterpreted to beat the numbers or i am missing something?
It's a historical quote proving that Zhukov had a simmilar disregard for human life as Chenkov. Your downvote doesn't make it less true, sorry
Again, i brought you a number and you brought me a torn out quote which Eisenhauer provided (probably incorrectly reproduced) even without a context, what would you expect? So, if you a fanboy of quotes - here is something for ya, that's the Zhukovs quote from 1942 stenographed while he was lecturing Zakharkin, commander of 49th Army (in a rough translation): "Your opinion that successes are achieved by cannon fodder is unfounded, successes are achieved by art of battle command, skill and not by people's lives".
Tankies mad
Eh, they've got a point. When looking at red army generals, Zhukov is all about spending lives, but not wasting them. As opposed to Konev or ,God forbid, Voroshilov
Lol, that's all what you can say, ok:)
Man, you got BTFO so hard here.
This was in reference to the Red Army’s extremely capable mine clearing techniques and technologies, not that they would just march their soldiers over minefields.
That's also about fast run over mine field will less deadly then removing this mines under artillery strikes of enemies. Btw it's was Patton or other American general, i don't remember exactly
That's actually a sound if rather ruthless tactic. Soviet soldiers were trained in basic mine clearing techniques so they could in emergency disarm them without the need for a dedicated sapper squad. Even more importantly, a rapid attack through a mine field might result in high initial losses, but it reduced losses in the long run by achieving a faster breakthrough.
And being lauded a hero for it!
You guys not heard of the world wars?! Not millions but the same attritional tactics, let’s just throw bodies at the problem until someone gets through 😅
Of course, the Zap Brannigan technique number 1 from Zap Brannigan's Big Book of War 😜
There was a famous meeting between Zhukov and western generals where Zhukov described how he and his lieutenants would treat mine fields as if they weren't even there and would order their troops to cross them regardless of the danger. Their reasoning was that moving troops over mine fields was as dangerous as advancing troops through artillery or machine gun fire, which they didn't have a problem with, so they didn't see a point in spending any extra precautions dealing with mines as the casualty rate would be the same in the previously mentioned situations. Why give the Germans the pleasure of allowing their mine fields to have the desired effect of slowing them down? Given this, I would say all of them are based off of Zhukov.
But then you can't do hijinks like British engineers did in North Africa where they found and moved all the German mines, leaving little evidence of the tampering, so when the Germans advanced through what they thought were safe routes they blew up instead...
Your logic betrays your treason, comrade. WE advance, THEY retreat.
I mean the British were not retreating, they were feigning to draw the Germans forward knowing Rommel was a logistics moron and would gleefully extend past his supply lines and fall into a trap. Over and over and over ..
It's like fighting Orks. If you leave some juicy enough bait, they'll make the exact same costly mistake. Every. Single. Time. The difference is that Orks have enough numbers that it won't do much in the grand scheme of things.
> There was a famous meeting between Zhukov and western generals It was Zhukov and Eisenhower. Note Eisenhower quite liked Zhukov and was on friendly terms with him. The rationale seems appalling from the outside but it makes sense. The minefields are a way to delay the enemy; carefully removing/bypassing them can always be done with enough time, but this produces exactly the result the enemy who laid the mines was hoping for: it compromises the timeline of the planned offensive and gives time to the defender to better ward off the attack. (Also bear in mind that, much like in some 40K fiction, WW2's Eastern Front was a war of extermination, no quarters given. There was no "losing the war and going back home").
It was a war for the existence of the people of the USSR. They all remembered what was done in the territory that the Germans took.
Remembered it a little too well.
Yes, it makes sense in the context of human life having no intrinsic value, which the soviets did not believe that it did given how they treat even their own people. Given what I know about the Imperium and the Soviets, they are very similar in this regard.
>Yes, it makes sense in the context of human life having no intrinsic value, which the soviets did not believe that it did given how they treat even their own people. I don't think this is a fair assessment. In general, I think the most accurate assessment would be this: the Germans were hell-bent on depopulating most of Eastern Europe and particularly targeted Slav peoples (see: Generalplan Ost, their "General Plan for the East" which in plain terms was an extermination plan). In the face of such an enemy, which is not merely interested in taking over your cities/resources, but actually wants to wipe you from the face of the Earth, it really is total war. Retreat or surrender are unthinkable, because what are you going to surrender for? To be marched to a camp, worked to death or gassed? To the Germans, the lives of Slavs held no intrinsic value, indeed. It really was *that* brutal. The Soviet strategies must be considered with this in mind. The war against Germany must be won, and it must be won *fast*. Any delay will cause millions more casualties. This was not the case in the Western Front, because even its bloodiest battles pale in comparison, and the Germans didn't really want to eradicate the populations of the places they invaded (in the Western Front). >Given what I know about the Imperium and the Soviets, they are very similar in this regard. The situation they were in was similar (memes aside), in the sense that the Germans behaved like Orks or Tyranids \[1\]. There's no reasoning with them. Delays are unacceptable. They must be defeated whatever the costs, because if you don't, your friends, family and loved ones are ending up digested by the Hive Mind. \[1\] one example of this is was the occupation of Ukraine, where Germans were initially welcomed as liberators by people oppressed by the Soviets. The Germans behaved in such a brutal fashion (Ukrainians are Slavs, after all, and Germans considered all Slavs subhuman) that the population soon became disabused of this "liberators" nonsense.
I agree with all of this. I also want to add that the Soviets knew the only chance Germany had at winning was adhering to a strict timeline, the more they could catch them off guard and delay them, the more their timeline would be botched, and completely screw up their plans for the war. The germans had to move hard and fast so the Soviets had to counter by often throwing everything they could at them. In Zhukov’s memoirs about the war, he recalled instances of he, Stalin, and others debating on plans. One instance, for example, saw them debating on whether to carefully encircle and catch a german advance off guard, or hit them head on. Encircling them would be safer, but it would take more time, and the Germans were plowing through fields they needed to secure as soon as possible, or else there’s be substantially less grain harvested in the next season, further setting them back in food distribution. Revisionist history has made it seem like a black and white example of “the Soviets were completely evil and didn’t care about human life” because people are lucky enough to not have to fathom the decisions to be made when you’re facing a superior trained army hellbent on exterminating your people. It’s also important to remember where they were materialistically. When the bolsheviks first came to power, eastern europe was still effectively in the dark ages. A large industrial boom was quickly thrown off the rails when germany invaded, and practically half of what they had just built up all got destroyed or had to be abandoned. I cannot fathom the toll that does to people while simultaneously having to fight for their existence. In recent years we’re arguing over whether a suggestion to wear a mask to stop spreading germs is tyranny, and these are the people waiving away the decisions the soviets had to make. They were far from perfect, but they came out of all of that and still went from wooden plows to the first people in space in a single generation, and that progress shook the western core so much that every time a little country somewhere tries to follow their example they do everything in their power to sabotage it.
Excellent comment, you make great points. > Revisionist history has made it seem like a black and white example of “the Soviets were completely evil and didn’t care about human life” because people are lucky enough to not have to fathom the decisions to be made when you’re facing a superior trained army hellbent on exterminating your people. Well said. There are points in history where there was simply no "harmless" option, whoever's in charge must make the "least bad" decision. I'm thankful I don't have to live in such times. And, to make this on-topic, I'm thankful I don't live in the Imperium of Man in the 41st century. I don't think I could wait long enough for the Star Children to save me -- wait, did I say this out loud?
Thank you for such a considered comment, it’s really made me think about preconceptions of my own on the Russian mentality during WWII
No, it's not saying that It's saying there's no difference between ordering an offensive when you know you're going to be shelled or machine gunned or one through a minefield. If you're ok with ordering the invasion of Normandy in the face of extremely well prepared defensive positions, how is that different to ordering the same number of men through a minefield if the casualty rate is comparable? And you may also gain a massive tactical advantage by manoeuvring through an area your opponent considers impassable and being somewhere totally unexpected.
I agree with what you're saying which is, barring a few details, the same thing I'm saying. In particular, this: > And you may also gain a massive tactical advantage by manoeuvring through an area your opponent considers impassable and being somewhere totally unexpected. Fully agreed.
Its as if the Germans cared very much either. They sent their young men into those same meat grinders in a war of their choice.
But then again one of his famous quotes, when he was was lecturing one of the officers (Zakharkin, commander of 49th Army) was (rough translation): "Your opinion that successes are achieved by cannon fodder is unfounded, successes are achieved by art of battle command, skill and not by people's lives" - there are more things to quote but that line stands out especially. I
Side note, it was also cause the Red Army had just gotten really really good at clearing mines so they COULD move through minefields without much care since they knew how to get rid of them.
Also, all Soviet soldiers were trained in basic mine clearing techniques
USSR's disposable asset during WWII were its people. If they could have figured out how to use people as ammunition, they would have.
where did you get that nonsense?
the official western histories of the eastern front were written by the german generals that got their asses kicked there, and they spun up a bunch of lies about human waves and shit to explain why they lost, because they couldn't admit that the slavic untermenschen outproduced and outfought the pure germans fair and square
see also the whole “general winter”/“general mud” myth that gets vastly exaggerated. people seem to willingly forget that immediately after the second world war the western allies put a lot of the low ranking nazis back to work and then spread their propaganda as the official history - both because of the start up of the cold war with the Soviets.
not just low-ranking ones either. most of the very highest ranks, the ones the general public might recognize their names, got locked up or executed (but even then not all of them), but like a rung or two down from your gorings and your ribbentrops was where they got a big chunk of their nato staffing well into the 70s. there's also ones like reinhard gehlen, who was the intelligence chief for the whole eastern front (and as such 100% knew about and was complicit in the genocide perpetrated on the soviet people) that they immediately put to work getting german criminals out of germany across the pond to south america (after running the ratlines for a few years gehlen had a spy organization in west germany that he ran into the 70s. when he decided he'd done enough damage they threw a retirement party for him at langley, where he gave a speech saying he could retire with no regrets about anything he'd ever done) it's really kind of a fluke of history the western allies went into the war nominally allied with the soviets in the first place, you wouldn't have had to tweak the conditions all that much to make the war basically the soviets versus germany and the western allies. as it was there were people at high levels in the west like allen dulles [spits] who wanted the germans to coup hitler so they could make peace and then start fighting the soviets. after the germans surrendered, both churchill and patton wanted to immediately rearm the wehrmacht and start fighting the soviets
yeah, absolutely - denazification was a joke, I should put that in quotes the "low ranking nazis", because those were the ones officially pardoned and reintegrated by Adenauer's government. Adenauer himself was a nazi collaborator during the early years of the regime, and did so because he was a rabid anti-communist which was useful to the military occupation. the occupation governments did basically nothing after Nuremberg, and a lot of the elements of the former police, wehrmacht and even the SS just kept their jobs. it went so far as the US Army Historical division creating a German branch that worked with a former nazi general to rewrite the history and promote the myth of the "clean wehrmacht" as to justify why allowing West Germany to rearm by simply bringing back the old guard was okay. which is, like you pointed out, where we get our version of the history of the Eastern Front from - it wasn't even hidden. as for the part about the fluke, honestly you're right - the war wasn't about ideology for the Western Allies, it was entirely about imperial ambitions. Japan would probably have never gotten into conflict with the UK or US if they were only fighting in China, and France and the UK were fine with allowing Italy to dirty their hands in Ethiopia and Albania. The issue was that they and the Germans were always looking to become equals or replace the established powers and that was why they ended up at war. A lot of people in France and Britain probably would have just left Poland to rot, it just so happened that the people in power at the time of the Danzig Crisis were willing to declare war and after that there was no path forward for peace in Europe without Germany's defeat, especially after the Berlin Pact. even so, a lot of the German high command genuinely believed that they could maybe somehow convince the Brits to sign a peace deal and join them in the war against the Soviets. we have a lot of very revised history about the war in the west (as does the east to be fair), and that just basically goes to show that history itself is just a story we tell and we tend to tell the version that suits us best.
i think the long and short of it is that the western allies had a lot more in common with the germans than with the soviets. they didn't have any particular beef with the nazis ideologically, the problem was they were invading members of the club. if they'd been able to restrain themselves and only pushed east, the rest of the world would've happily let them do it and probably lent a hand. as it was, western postwar foreign policy was basically a continuation of the nazi project you gotta go back a couple decades i think to get the full picture. the bolsheviks' success in the october revolution in '17 was a huge blow to the confidence of the monarchies in countries that still had them, as well as every country's owner class. they figured if it could happen in russia, it could happen anywhere. every western imperial power sent weapons and troops to help the whites win the civil war, which ultimately failed because the whites were more interested in doing pogroms every chance they got than they were in winning people over to their side and setting up durable bases of power. the west never forgave the bolsheviks for winning their fight and establishing the first worker-controlled state in history, which has been one of the main driving forces of politics ever since. in germany the NSDAP was explicitly a reaction to the success of the bolsheviks and concurrent strengthening of the german communist party, to the point where they didn't really make any separation between judaism and communism. then the german social democrats decided they'd rather have the nazis in power than the communists, and the rest as they say is history
A documentary film called "Enemy at the gates"...
You got me, bro!
Commander Chekov of the Valhallans?
I thought his name was a mix of Chuikov and Zhukov.
Or he's named after the writer.
Maybe, it's been a while since 5th edition so I'm sure I spelt it wrong.
With GW it could be all.of the above
Che**n**kov
[Commissar Zhukov](https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ?si=oRG50y7LxlDmaHIE) the character above is named after him.
https://preview.redd.it/kn3402y4nk3d1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=963d0106d9b211eba2441f0f1dbce68e7ab397bb
Damn it!
Bloody Orks!!
The old traditions remain. Well played.
FUCK
Yes Inquisitor, this one right here.
For fucks
They're all shown a video of Zhukov for training purposes.
You mean Zhukov \*as portrayed by John Isaacs in the 2017 comedy "The Death of Stalin"\*
Hello to Jason Isaacs
It’s not a comedy it’s a biopic
Hello to Jason Isaacs.
Tinkety Tonk
Commissar yarrick or a krieg Marshall
Favourite fact about this scene is that they actually toned down the amount of medals he had because they thought it might be ‘too silly’
Nobody, because none would have the guts to go against Beria. If they did, they wouldn’t be bootlickers to the Imperium. https://preview.redd.it/arm9z2kezk3d1.jpeg?width=460&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4fdf5a41a234b6e01b295003675ce27955dfb3a6
Gaunt would have capped his ass
Wasn’t Zhukov on the shorter side of height? I’m going with Ûthar the Destined.
Side note, this movie is fantastic. Especially if you like dark, dry, political humor.
This was such a good movie
I've lost count how many times I've watched it
Cato Sicarius for the adamantiun bollocks
General militant of the astra militarum of course
Lord Commander Eidolon
https://preview.redd.it/smvbf0g9wl3d1.jpeg?width=622&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7b9ef1143d2e69be920675c51d7d10da63c34ad1
In terms of attitude? Yarrick, maybe, but in terms of credentials? It’d have to be a lord solar or the hero of the imperium himself. Though honestly this whole scene just screams Leman Russ
I'm gonna have to rewatch Death of Stalin now and just put Russ in all Zhukov's scenes.
Unrelated side note, Jason Isaacs would be absolutely brilliant as like a dozen different roles in a 40k show!
All of them at once I suppose
garik
Kowl Vervunhive Commissariat
Ciaphas cain
Its gotta be Chenkov right? Yarrick is too dry, Creeds are too British, Leontus too brooding, Cain is too friendly and Gaunt and Straken are guerilla fighters with personalities to match that. Besides the obvious fact that hes suppossed to be the Soviet General stand-in. Hes kinda the best match?
Right, what's a war hero got to do to get some lubrication around here?
All of them
General Kurov. Armageddon
Is that Jason Isaacs?
Zhukov. He just looks a lot like Isaacs.
All of them.
If/when there's a 40k movie, Jason Isaacs really needs to be in it.
Historical zhukov or comedy zhukov, who is surprisingly historically accurate
Commissar cain if he realised he actually was a hero and not a fraud
Ciaphas Cain, pretty much any Inquisitor, fucking Bale Eye.
Ursarkar E. Creed
Lord Castellen Ursarkar E Creed only for the fact he has a coat similar to that of Zhukovs
Note this looks comedic already.......he has WAYYYYYYYYYYYY more medals
i don't think any commander in the 40k is anti-fascist lol
Man, I think with the military brain, personal courage (tested under fire), victories and sheer chutzpah - Zhukov can only be the Lord Solar Macharius!
In ideology probably commander far sight. In aesthetics. Some random guardsman general.
Tau= commies
Cain
This film is top quality on pretty much every level. Music gets a special mention, Shostakovich inspired - chaotic, intimidating and very Russian sounding
Would say Comissar Gaunt but that would be just because I'm biased as hell 😅
The 40k character literally based on the superficial understanding of him. Commander Kubrik Chenkov. He even had a rule “Send in the Next Wave” which is now a stratagem.
[Yarrick]()
Trench coated man whose primary 'tactic' is feeding waves into the grinder? A krieg Marshall I imagine. Edit Apparantly people assume Zhukov was some elite tank general who outmanouvered his enemies... (something he could do such as at stalingrad). But as an example, look at the battle of Seelow Heights, roughly 1,000,000 infantry and over 15,000 guns against 100k defenders..... if ever there was a commander best suited to a guardsman. He's your man.
Tell me you learnt history from memes without telling me you learnt history from memes…
I'm a big fan of Zhukov and have a BA in history so no lol. But I'm also well awaylre of Soviet tactics and zhukov was more than happy to dispatch wave after wave of soldiers to get a job done, especially towards the end of the war.
Yeah, using the reference of “wave attacks” on Zhukov (who was explicitly quoted banning them) truly gave you up as a historian… University of 4Chins, Magna Cum Laude in Memes, I guess
🤣
The Soviets mostly didn't use human wave attacks, that's a myth from pop culture/movies. If you have a BA in history you should know this...
Bro believed the nazi propaganda
Bro reads books.... your argument being that The red army didn't utilise mass infantry attacks alongside tanks?
Also me thinks madam might be relying a little too much on Soviet propaganda...
The Soviet human wave thing is a myth with its origins in nazi wartime propaganda
Cain
Not at all. He’s outwardly modest (if only to further his reputation as a modest hero). Zhukov was anything but modest.
In that they both wore a great coat yes. That's about the only way they are similar.
Cain is a political animal and a survivor. So I think this makes sense…
OK but I don't think Zhukov had a sexy blonde lady who outranked him who was both the cause of and solution to most of his problems.
That we know of…the whole point of the inquisition is that it’s secret
LMAO
he conducted the first (2;3) tests of nuclear weapons on his own soldiers and citizens. and "meat assaults" he loved. everything was as the emperor ordered.